In my gaming culture, it is assumed, but of course no player is held hostage and forced to play. I don't think a player though would try to force the DM to play his way. He might argue a rule that the DM ostensibly says he supports and is enforcing. But, if the DM makes a final judgment no one would dispute that. If you feel like the DM is ruling badly a lot then you just find one that isn't doing that and join that group. So sure these gamer "roles" are imbued into our gaming culture.This isn't strictly true, though. House rules can be overridden by the table, assuming non-dysfunctional social contracts. At functional tables, players can have input and suggest house rules as well, and the table agrees to them or not. In cases where the GM is exerting unilateral authority, I'd say that this is still either by implied consent of the table, or dysfunction exists.